The wikipedia article on the Einstein field equations makes the
statement that
R_uv = (1/2)*R*g_uv
reduces to
R_uv = 0
by performing the "reverse trace". Can someone explain this to me?
-Mike
Igor - 30 Jan 2007 19:02 GMT
> The wikipedia article on the Einstein field equations makes the
> statement that
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> -Mike
No performing involved. The trace of the Einstein tensor is the same
as the trace of the Ricci tensor, except with the opposite sign.
Dumbledore_ - 30 Jan 2007 19:08 GMT
> The wikipedia article on the Einstein field equations makes the
> statement that
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> -Mike
Yes.
Eliminate the 1/2, that's a non-zero constant.
Eliminate R or the result is trivial, so all that is left is g_uv = 0.
But we knew that, everything about relativity is built on zero.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/DominoEffect.GIF
c = 0/0
Daryl McCullough - 30 Jan 2007 21:17 GMT
>The wikipedia article on the Einstein field equations makes the
>statement that
> R_uv = (1/2)*R*g_uv
>reduces to
> R_uv = 0
>by performing the "reverse trace". Can someone explain this to me?
Hmm. I'm not sure what is meant by "reverse trace", but I do
understand the conclusion:
Start with
R_uv = 1/2 R g_uv
multiplying both sides by g^uv and summing gives
sum over u,v of R_uv g^uv = sum over u,v 1/2 R g_uv g^uv
The left side gives, by definition, R.
The right side gives 2R (because sum over u,v g_uv g^uv = 4).
so we have
R = 2R
which implies R=0.
--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY
Mike - 31 Jan 2007 00:10 GMT
Thanks Daryl, I think I understand.
That raises another question though.
What guarantee is there that g_uv is symmetric?
-Mike
JanPB - 31 Jan 2007 00:17 GMT
> Thanks Daryl, I think I understand.
>
> That raises another question though.
> What guarantee is there that g_uv is symmetric?
Its definition.
--
Jan Bielawski